[philbaum]

Early on in my dslr adventure, i bought a Sig 10-20. Its an excellent lens, sharp and fun to use, but its just not that important to me anymore. I suspect that we all have sweet spots for the F/L we like to shoot at. I get far more recognition for the landscape shots i take with normal to moderate tele F/Ls than the UWA.

The widest lens i normally carry is a DA21, which i enjoy. I think we need to explore and determine the FL that work best for us, because we don't all enjoy the same ones - my theory. I would rather have the DA15 than the DA12-24 because its easier to carry and a stellar lens IMO. But again, neither of them are the priority for me. They are both excellent lenses.

[LennyBloke]

Hi Simon, that little special "something" is very hard to define, particularly with wide angle lenses. In general (and I'm sure there will be other opinions on this) a portrait length lens is easier to see different qualities in (Bokeh, Pixie-dust, etc), but a wide angle is more often judged in terms of contrast and sharpness (corners are a favourite area of criticism). My personal opinion in comparing the 14mm and the 15mm is that I have more "keepers" from the 15mm, but I would be happy shooting with either. If you are happy with the results from the 12-24 then stick with it, if your not first try experimenting with your technique (smaller aperture, lower angles, etc) and if your still not happy then sell it and buy a Prime.

[northcoastgreg]

I did in a sense swap out the DA 15 for the DA 12-24. Although it wasn't a straight swap; I already had a 20mm prime and I along with the DA 15 I also got a DA 16-45. In other words, I'm not sure it would be wise to do a straight swap unless you already have part of the DA 12-24 focal length already covered by other fine glass, particularly on the long end.

I did not make the swap because of the smaller size of the DA 15. The size of the 12-24 never bothered me. I made the swap because I just found that the 12-24 was not versatile enough to justify keeping it around. I prefer primes and only use zooms when I absolutely need focal range versatility. If I find myself swapping off a zoom as much as I would a prime, it's of no use to me and has to go. That's what happened to the 12-24. I got the DA 15 as a speciality UWA prime.

If it's a matter of IQ, the DA 15 is "better" than the DA 12-24 is at 15mm: the DA 15 is slighly sharper, has slightly better contrast, renders with a bit more clarity, and features slighty better color rendition. In other words, the DA 15 does have that "pixie dust" quality that people talk about; but the DA 12-24 has a pinch of that same quality, just not as much.

[johnyates]

I sold my 15mm and bought the 12-24. My problem with the 15mm is the curvature of field. I shoot landscapes and the 15mm just isn't suitable. For me, the 12-24 is a far better choice.

[pcarfan]

I went from an all prime shooter to mostly zooms, so I sold my da15 and just now got the 12-24. Will know by end of may whether it holds up to its repute, but i think it would be fine. You really can't go wrong with either. It's more about size and focal length. The DA15 renders very well, but I would not call it special (like the FA limteds), it's more like my DA21, which to me is an excellent lens (only kept that and the FA43 for primes, which is down right magical,... no two ways about that lens).

[SpecialK]

I have both. The 15 would go before the 12-24, as the zoom range is very handy. The 15 has that extra something, but not enough to matter, and I often want to go wider. I have no idea what "complete IQ" is, sorry.

[simonkit]

Thanks again....I've stopped the deliberation and just placed an order for the DA15mm - the "DA15mm blows my mind" thread finally sealed things, I'll now have the advantage of comparing side by side so should be interesting.

Simon

[gtl]

The extra something would be the unbelievable flare resistance of the 15mm. It is truly remarkable. And shooting landscapes, the 15mm is sharper stepped down to f8 compared to the 12-24mm going by photozone numbers.

[Ash]

Congrats and enjoy the 15 ltd. If you're happy zooming with your feet a little, you'll find it no disadvantage at all to the 12-24 or any other WA zoom.

[twitch]

Congratulations on the 15ltd. I own both 12-24 and da15 and I would not have a seconds hesitation in swapping a da12-24 for a da15.

[SOldBear]

I have both. I don't use either one a lot. But when I shoot real estates for my friend, I strictly use the 12-24mm because of its versatility. To me, the 15mm is a pair of dress shoes when I want to impress people (can't remember the last time I did that) and the 12-24mm is a pair of sneakers when I want something that can go anywhere comfortably.

[simonkit]

One of the other reasons for buying the DA15mm is that a lot of (if not all) Pro landscape photographers emphasise how using a prime improves your landscape photography by making you take more time of/think more about composition, I've just been on a workshop with Joe Cornish, a reknowed UK landscape photographer and he said very much the same thing - it will be interesting to put this theory into practice

Simon

[northcoastgreg]

One of the other reasons for buying the DA15mm is that a lot of (if not all) Pro landscape photographers emphasise how using a prime improves your landscape photography by making you take more time of/think more about composition

I'm not sure how many pro landscape photogs emphasize the use of primes (most of the landscape pics I run across shot by pros are shot with zoom lenses), but it is true that primes can help your landscape photography, not merely by slowing you down, but also by forcing you to see what's possible at a specific focal length.

[wjjstu]

15mm is not wide enough for urban environments.

[Canada_Rockies]

I'm solidly in the 12-24 camp. My first digital (and only ...) K10D came in a kit with the 12-24 and grip. For critical distortion control, I use DxO Pro to straighten things out. For general landscape use, the versatility of the zoom - get close and wide, back up and go narrower etc. - is for me.